I've been reading about this interesting wine for a couple of weeks, and decided to have a taste off this weekend with a few zin lovers -- it occured to me that that WLDGers might like to join in. The labelling sure is fun -- I hope the wine matches up.

Here are a few things I've learned:

"Seven of Lodi's best growers gave their souls and the firstfruits of each of their old vine vineyards to contribute to the layered complexity of this fanciful blend. Soft, supple pepper and licorice-clove notes merge into a sinful marriage of deep, brambly blackberries and lustful cherries. The finish is clean on the palate with hints of rich vanilla, cocoa, and mild tannins. Michael~David Vineyards.

Here's a short history of the brand from "Wine Business Monthly" a couple of years ago:

[i]Located on the west side of Lodi, California, Michael David Winery is run by two brothers (Michael and David Phillips) from a family that has farmed in Lodi for five generations. The operation presently farms some 375 acres and sells grapes to a number of large wineries. The winery operation was started in 1984 in an old hay barn and was named Phillips Vineyards. That changed in 1999 after legal disputes with R.H. Phillips Winery and Phillips Distributing of Minnesota over the name. The winery then became Michael David Winery. The brothers were soon brainstorming for marketing names, and one of the names they came up with was Seven Deadly Zins, for their blend of old vine Zinfandel grapes that was being supplied to the winery by seven different Lodi growers.

In the last two years, the brand has taken off and was poised to sell more than 80,000 cases in 2004. It is now distributed in 46 states at a suggested retail price of $17. "It's a fun package," winemaker David Phillips said. "People love the label, they love the idea. They think it's clever. A lot of people try it to bring as a gift at dinner because it stands out on the shelf.

"It takes the whole package to make something successful," said Phillips. "But even though it's a fun label, it worked because the wine is good. We wouldn't have grown this fast if the wine wasn't high quality. We're picky about quality; we grow mostly our own grapes but also buy correctly from other quality vineyards we've selected over time."

Phillips said the brand's recent achievements have him traveling across the country and enjoying newfound recognition for the wine. "It's nice to have people appreciate what you're doing, especially in an area that's not known that well. We're using deficit irrigation, shoot thinning, leaf pulling and balanced production to get good concentration and color and tannins. Lodi is coming up. We can compete against any other wine region in California with our grapes here in Lodi."

It appears to be easy to find, at least in this area, and Wine Search Pro shows liistings for it in the US -- including no vintage indications and the 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2004 vintages.

Join in the fun, and post your notes!

Regards, Bob

PS: thanks to Bob Parson and Bill Buitenhuys for discussing this wine and introducing me to the idea of this Open Mike suggestion. Bob and Bill Repartee.

I'll chime in here. We just received this wine (I double check vintage later this week) but it was just an ugly wine. And, for a change, I wasn't alone in my evaluation. Great wine for the shoppe as we'll sell a bunch based upon name and/or marketing alone, regardless of what is in the bottle. Cash cow.
BP

Just an ugly wine?Not sure if you are giving it the thumbs down? I think we all should get to taste it first and try not to prejudge a wine a few of us are interested in tasting. Please correct me if I am wrong?

Oh yeah, it is a vintage! `04 written in small letters. I am hearing a lot of hype about these David wines so will be interesting to try. I really enjoy my zin so this will be a nice starter upper for the upcoming winter, along with the port of course!!

Just an ugly wine?Not sure if you are giving it the thumbs down? I think we all should get to taste it first and try not to prejudge a wine a few of us are interested in tasting. Please correct me if I am wrong?

Bob,
UGLY= a definite thumbs down. I'm not sure I get the drift of your prejudge comment. I have recently tasted the wine and expressed my opinion. I doubt my opinion would or should affect anyone else's opinion of the wine...it's not like I'm the pointy guy or something, although I understand he is looking for "hired help" and I should apply if I wield that kind of influence. Perhaps I have violated some rule of this Open Mike thingy, but I haven't received my WLDG decoder ring.
Bill

Bob Ross wrote:Interesting, Bill. Do your customers like it? Or is it just a pretty face?

I think we have three different vintages, 2002, 2003 and 2004, so there will be a range of vintages, if not of opinion.

Please check the vintage if you still can.

Regards, Bob

Bob,
We sold out of the couple/three cases that were in stock..it always elicits a snicker or two from the non-hardcore wine customers and they buy a bottle. Also, it usually gets some type of review in the local "Gannett Rag" that helps put a spike in demand. I envy their marketing abilities, if not their winemaking.
I did confirm that it was the 2004 vintage that I tasted.
BP

Redwinger wrote:I'll chime in here. We just received this wine (I double check vintage later this week) but it was just an ugly wine. And, for a change, I wasn't alone in my evaluation. Great wine for the shoppe as we'll sell a bunch based upon name and/or marketing alone, regardless of what is in the bottle. Cash cow.BP

What does "just an ugly wine" mean? that you didn't like it, certianly, I understand that. But why? "Ugly" is not a term I'm acquainted with in terms of wine reviews.

Redwinger wrote:I'll chime in here. We just received this wine (I double check vintage later this week) but it was just an ugly wine. And, for a change, I wasn't alone in my evaluation. Great wine for the shoppe as we'll sell a bunch based upon name and/or marketing alone, regardless of what is in the bottle. Cash cow.BP

Bill,
You got support here. You have to call them like you see them. I wasn't going to participate because other than Rafanelli I do not drink zins, but a bigger reason is that I do not drink wines with cute names or cute labels. It means only one thing, crap inside. My indifference to zins is a personal palate thing but cute labels and names is a universal thing, bad!!!

Hi Isaac,
I think you're on the right track about me not liking the wine.
Further details on the Redwinger rating scale, including definitions of "Ugly" along with "'Pony Butt". "Panther Piss" and other favorite descriptors, will require a paid subscription to "What do Hoosiers know about wine or anything else, including basketball". Volume 1 is due out any day now.

wrcstl wrote:I do not drink wines with cute names or cute labels. It means only one thing, crap inside. My indifference to zins is a personal palate thing but cute labels and names is a universal thing, bad!!!

No cute animals then? Okay! If you're not going to drink that Cheval Blanc, can I have it?

And we have not started talking about wine hang tags either!! BTW I just checked, we had a total of 20 replies for the Bubbly Open Mike, we are already at 19 for this Zin thingy...and we have not started yet!!! I am going for a haircut.

wrcstl wrote:I do not drink wines with cute names or cute labels. It means only one thing, crap inside. My indifference to zins is a personal palate thing but cute labels and names is a universal thing, bad!!!

No cute animals then? Okay! If you're not going to drink that Cheval Blanc, can I have it?

Never noticed the label. I have only one bottle of Cheval Blanc in my cellar, a 1945, coming your way.
Walt

Redwinger wrote:Hi Isaac,I think you're on the right track about me not liking the wine.Further details on the Redwinger rating scale, including definitions of "Ugly" along with "'Pony Butt". "Panther Piss" and other favorite descriptors, will require a paid subscription to "What do Hoosiers know about wine or anything else, including basketball". Volume 1 is due out any day now.